Are Tesla fucked...

Not to mention 100 years worth of battery technology.

He took a huge gamble with his "gigafactory".
Turns out mass producing complex products with thousands of components isn't that simple.
Should have just used an existing car manufacturer with at least several decades of experience.

Holy shit. How can one man be this based?

Attached: 1495781559648.jpg (154x250, 27K)

>"I-it's not like I want my company to succeed, baka!"

So based that he's costing his company the millions it so desperately needs

it might be based if he wasn't CEO of a public company
>yo fuck money and profits and shit
>oh wait, investors bought our stock to make money

>that dead cat bounce

Mercedes and Toyota Will made good electrocars definitely.

>Are Tesla fucked?
GM lost 4 billion dollars and is on a fast track to bankruptcy, Tesla is fine

Attached: gmshill.jpg (808x805, 124K)

>Mercedes
What are their motors going to explode like their engines?

awesome, now I can afford to buy some shares

he so based that all the upper tiers left the company in the last months, cause they know tesla will bomb hard the next months

Can someone explain to me how a car with no "fuel" can fire up?

they were objectively better than petrol cars at the time you fucking idiot, but cheap oil drove them out of the market

why don't you build that first and then we'll see

>have small impact crash
>batteries fly off and kill pedo-estrian
>???
>profit

how is he costing his company anything? If they've already sold the stock why does the stock price need to remain high?

>"no fuel"
like so it's powered by love or something? well technically that would still be fuel.

>how is he costing his company anything?

You mean aside from losing thousands on every car he sells?

Germany??

>Nikola sued Tesla
you literally cant make this shit up

fortune.com/2018/05/02/tesla-lawsuit-nikola-truck-patent-infringement/

You do realize that investors buy stock with the expectation of it becoming more valuable, right?

>AC motors
uhhh...no. Tesla and other electric cars use DC motors. Converting from battery, which is DC, to AC, is lossy and retarded.

Someday there will have to be an Affordable Car Act and a Health Car Exchange. Po' folks can't into mandatory self-driving vehicles otherwise.

>you buy stocks because the value will go up

Attached: 1524977934305.png (703x911, 19K)

Please, tell us the *real* reason investors purchase shares.

Stock price doesn't really affect his company, most (if not all) of their revenue from stocks comes from their IPO

In other words, he's burning through cash and is desperate to raise new capital

Every person I know who got a tesla is a cuck. Stay away from that cuck brand.

Majority of my portfolio is of stocks that I don't expect to increase in value at all, but they do give large dividends. Largest dividend paying stock I have gives about 15% a year but the price remains the same.

What dividends is Tesla paying out?

Oh right, they've never paid out dividends because they're not profitable

Attached: Capture.png (559x197, 15K)

Yes I think Tesla is fucked. Not short term maybe, but soon. For a two reasons:

1) They treat cars like Apple treats their PC's and phones, that is, Apple can refuse to support their product "just because", which is a potentially life threatening situation that will get them into big ass lawsuits once their cars are widespread enough. (i.e. they refused a mandatory airbag recall on a flood damaged tesla that was repaired because it was in their black list of vin numbers. So that car runs around with a faulty airbag because Tesla says so.)
They also deny all sort of diagnostic software and hardware, which is crazy in the car world.

2) That, added to their shitty QC and horrible build quality and philosophy (the Tesla 3 has no fucking dash and all controls have no physical feedback, again, bordering on life threatening for a car.) means that when the big producers are ready to put their electrical vehicles on the market (which is, very soon) Tesla will just not be relevant, like that they'll just go away and be relevant only in parallel services, like household renewable energies, EV recharge stations and maybe the luxury cars will still be there, in reduced numbers. That's the best case scenario.

Musk wanted to make a car for everyone, he failed, the Tesla 3 is a horrible concept car placed into the real world, it's just not good enough and it implements stupid ideas that will get people killed, the lawsuits will sink Tesla and VW, Toyota, Ford, Fiat, Renault etc. will just sweep in with their own EV's and take over the market.

When did I say they do? I was just pointing out the fact there are reasons to buy certain stocks even if you don't think the price will go up.

And you're being deliberately obtuse. No one invests in a company expecting to lose money. Stop being a retard.

>lose money
The reason that I gave to buy stocks even if you don't think the price will go up still makes you money through dividends. Stop being a retard.

dividens dummy

Again, deliberately obtuse. Now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing.

>still makes you money

Yes, that's the fucking point. STFU.

see

I think you've hit quite a few points on the head. A few of my friends, for example, think the Model 3 is great. They don't understand ergonomics and how a touchscreen is dangerous as fuck.

As an example, I asked how they'll change their HVAC settings or radio settings without looking at the screen, they evaded the question. Hell, BMW doesn't even do touchscreens because in a car they are difficult as fuck to touch what you want. They have that scroll wheel iDrive thing.

I was reading something about sedans and how American's aren't buying them anymore. I sincerely hope Toyota, Honda, etc don't decided to stop making them like Ford did. Civics, etc, are a necessity in my opinion. My Civic works, has good gas mileage, and does everything I need it to, even drive in the mountains.

Hopefully Tesla and Musk will fail, he has no business running a company.

There’s a ton of government subsidies for e cars now. Not so much in 1920s.

They THINK it's great, but can they afford it?

>Yes!
Great, Tesla makes money!
>No!
I think this is the case, and Tesla makes no money!

Anyways I think the Tesla 3 will just be a toy for rich people that will eventually get bored of it. It makes no sense as a driving machine like it's supposed to be. I mean it was supposed to be the biggest thing since sliced bread, the breakthrough in the automotive world, and it was just kinda hidden under the rug. Nobody talks about the 3, and it's not because they aren't shipping many (well, they aren't, okay) but it's because everyone who has it doesn't want to speak about the car because it's just a fashion statement and not "everybody's EV" like it was supposed to be.

And all this because Musk had to be an edgy memelord about it, they just had to give it some steering wheel controls, a dash, a couple of handles, that's it. It's a car!

I hope they go bankrupt.
All of sudden they package deal self driving with electric cars and the idea that people won't own cars anymore, you'll have to call from a fleet and pay a continuous fee with no opportunity for ownership. You see no one bat an eye to this because people have already been conditioned for it by paid digital distribution such as itunes and Steam.
Stop paying for digital distribution.

>You see no one bat an eye to this because people have already been conditioned for it
they're conditioned for it not for what you mentioned, but because most people actually finance cars for some reason and get new ones every couple of years.

Personally, I enjoy not having a car payment.

Doesn't matter.
DC motor is as efficient as AC. They are still used in some shitholes in public thansportation.
Dunno, since batteries are 25% heavier, that petrol tank and gasoline engine.
The nearest good thing is hydrogen cars, since they are essentially electric cars with 30% efficiency, but with convenient filling system and more greener in long run, since there are no batteries.

found the cuck whos too far gone

uhhh... no. They use AC motors and there is a new technology you may not heard of and it's called VFD. Lurk moar.
Really new though, it's patent was issued on 1910.

t. Electrical Engineer

Why the fuck would they waste their time converting from AC to DC, back to AC when they could just convert from AC to DC and be done with it using it in-system? The best DC-DC switching converter would have an efficiency of 95%-98%. I doubt an inverter would be any better.

t. electrical engineer

4D chess.

again, why does it matter if you've already floated the shares?

Main sources of hydrogen for fuel are natural gas and coal. Another source is electrolysis, which takes an economically unfeasible amount of electricity. Hydrogen also does not liquefy under compression, so a hydrogen fuel tank will have to be either very large, very VERY high pressure, or very small capacity.

The real solution is developing public transit with electric rails, and the electricity comes from nuclear/solar/hydroelectric.

Yes, if battery technology ever gets good enough, the big guys will undercut Tesla on price per a car; and then it's over for Tesla. Batteries inherently suck though, so I'm a fan of that new electrified slot car track based design. Just connect to the electrified rail in the road, and no worries.

Since many do believe hydrogen is a source of energy I feel compelled to point out that it's NOT. It's a way of storing energy - think of it like a different kind of battery.

buy high sell low

>pedo-estrian

??????

yes
>Anschluss

Any private vehicle that relies on an external energy source is inherently awful. The whole point of cars is that they are ideal for places other than major cities. Most of the places that track would be economical are pointless to use a car in anyway.

I don't know why people don't think of cars as more of a fashion trend / statement then they are a utility in which people rely on, and need to upgrade like they do a phone. No one I know owns a car for it's a) practicality b) efficiency c) functionality. They own it merely based off it's aesthetics and the status that brand / model brings. Tesla has sold it's initial wave of cars and probably won't see an upturn for a while, but it does rely heavily on them making a budget version of the car.

Attached: 1522124332765.jpg (1272x892, 852K)

Shills are really out in force today...

cleantechnica.com/2018/03/11/tesla-model-3-motor-in-depth/

the naming is fucking topkek

Nikola Tesla is one name.

TESLA is falling apart:

business.financialpost.com/transportation/autos/update-4-the-price-of-cutting-off-analysts-for-tesla-its-2-billion

If you have Tesla stock (I hope you're not that crazy), sell ASAP.

Hmm, I have a deja vu, I've seen nearly identical thread about a year ago

You're the stupid fucker here, not him. He told you there are other ways to earn money from shares without trading them when they increase value, such as dividends. The fact that Tesla in particular doesn't do this does NOT invalidate his claim that you can earn money from shares without selling them.

Dumbfuck

yes because recent changes in California's EV subsidy law mandate "good labor relations" for EV MFGs who want subsidies. Given Tesla's ongoing racial discrimination lawsuit and their use of nonunion labor they're fucked as more and more car companies offer EVs or hybrids and America's largest auto market rips out the foundation of their business.

Attached: 1513109565579.jpg (640x640, 101K)

It won't, but the basic concept of an electric drivetrain does work. Better starting force and tractive effort overall, there's a reason why all railroads moved to diesel-electrics in the 1960s instead of staying with mechanically driven systems.

ever heard of a capital raising? pretty useful when you're burning through endless cash, but they tend to work better when your stock isn't tanking

no because the entire point of buying a car is to have a private space for yourself, if what you said was true then people would use public transit. Since people don't use public transit you're wrong.

Except this conversion is wasting 80% energy.
Yes, that's right, 20% of fuel in car is used to propell it forward, the rest is used to make noise and heat.

Just because the conversion rate is terrible doesn't mean that storing the effect of that conversion to a battery means that it's any better. It's the same inefficient outcome, just a different way of getting there.

Attached: full.png (1280x1024, 245K)

The problem with self driving cars isn't really the cars. It's the fact that the real world doesn't necessarily conform to the rules in the software.

For example, if you're driving on a road with faded lines and the car can't clearly detect them, then it will get confused and start making wrong maneuvers. There are probably a lot of unexpected situations like this that confuse the software. Once the software is confused, obviously the car is going to fucking crash. I'm also willing to bet that there are issues relating to memory/CPU; we all know there are times when shit is just slow for no reason and you need to reboot it because it started acting up at random; but if such a thing happened to your self driving car? The consequences are a bit more severe.

>The real solution is developing public transit with electric rails, and the electricity comes from nuclear/solar/hydroelectric.

If you have a cheap, abundant supply of electricity which that scenario implies, why not go for electrolytic production of Hydrogen anyway? Nuclear power plant with in-situ Hydrogen generation would be particularly interesting because the heat generated by fission could be used to provide a significant part of the energy required for the eletrolysis, potentially lowering the requirements for electrical currents.

More like 30% thermal efficiency, even higher for diesels, usually. Also, don't forget you can recover some of that wasted energy with turbochargers and power recovery turbines, that's why we're seeing gasoline engines with 40% to 50% thermal efficiency like the Mercedes-Benz F1 engine.

this picture is great because it has all the autism of Jow Forums contained into one image. All its missing is /a/nime and we have the full set.

You can't burn any of those.
I didn't look for the definition of fuel before posting, but just looking at it now
>material such as coal, gas, or oil that is burned to produce heat or power.
Why are you such an ignorant faggot?

Attached: 1511419162839.png (400x400, 60K)

>Leaf and Bolt already better than the model 3 while cheaper and other manufacturers releasing better cars next year

Tesla literally can’t compete

>ignores mainstream media and ad companies
>laughs at bankers/analysts
>makes moving coffins for liberals/vegans/cucks

THIS HAS TO STOP

Main problem with using Hydrogen as a fuel directly is the difficulty of storing it. IIRC you need to keep Hydrogen highly pressurized and use thick, heavy containers to contain it. Which is problematic for something like a vehicle which is at danger of crashing into things (BOOM) and which you'd want as light as possible anyway. There's really only two options for cars going forward: batteries or fuel cells.

why do you have no doubt? the economics and physics have never worked. all they have is (((Elon))) magic fagsauce

Are hydrocarbons/alcohols really that bad, though? They're still king when it comes to energy storage unless you consider nuclear fuels. Unless a miraculous breakthrough is made, hydrocarbons will be used in sectors where you can't afford to carry around lots of dead weight such as planes for the next 100 years or so.

...

>The real solution is developing public transit with electric rails, and the electricity comes from nuclear/solar/hydroelectric.
Yes, but shell claims that they have 80% efficiency of making hydrogen from water with electricity, and Toyota claims that their new engine is 40% efficient

>There are probably a lot of unexpected situations like this that confuse the software.

Not if you have very detailed and very up-to-date maps of every piece of road they ever drive on.

And there are companies making just that, using vehicles to scan roads.
Later they might even update the maps with every self driving vehicle passing, so on busy roads your map will never be more than a few minutes old.

because they think the value will go up

>Why the fuck would they waste their time converting from AC to DC, back to AC

Because modern AC motors can be controlled much better than DC motors.

Hint: "Tesla" is named after Nikola Tesla, who pioneered efficient AC motors.

when oil starts to run dry and gas prices go for some really big number*. might take decades. a war with iran could precipitate this though.

*someone do the math how many dollars per gallon before it's cheaper to buy a tesla than to pay for gas for your low mpg gasoline car.

maybe it'll be too high and by then only trucks transporting food and other essentials and buses for public transportation will be allowed and ppl will just use bicycles and tramways

Attached: main_8161891893_3fdf40db95_z_meitu_1.jpg (480x297, 231K)

i hope so. musk is kind of an annoying smug faggot.

You're an annoying smug faggot and you've done /far/ less than Musk. Who is worse?

There's three problems with that assertion, though.

1. What if someone introduces an alternative propulsion, such as fuel cell which is more cheaper than Tesla's electric motors+battery combo by then?
2. What if future iterations of IC engines become so efficient, oil prices would need to be at an unrealistically high level to make a EV viable?
3. What if we figure out how to get our fuel from other sources viably and with sufficient quantities? Lighter chain hydrocarbons/alcohols are extremely abundant in nature and can be acquired from renewable sources. You can also synthesize large amounts of heavier chain hydrocarbons through the Mobil or Fischer-Tropsch process, natural gas is usually the source of Hydrogen with Coal or organic matter being the source of Carbon.

>~1b/quarter burn rate
>3b current reserves
>Implying further dilution isn't coming